Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think gestation outside the body is a fab idea

184 replies

Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 18:47

Recent research makes the possibility of gestating a baby outside a woman’s body possible. Do we think this is a good idea or not?

OP posts:
Original poster
Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 22:24

Goody2ShoesAndTheFilthyBeast · 23/06/2025 22:21

Nah. Women would still be oppressed only it would be even worse because we would no longer be required for breeding.

We'd probably be kept like cattle and exist to serve and to service men.

Show quote history

Maybe you are right and our reproductive power is a source of strength. To be fair if women did not have to child bear, what would be the use of two sexes at all!!!! Especially if they can make gametes from skin cells - another thing that they are working on.

OP posts:
TooManyAnimals94 · 23/06/2025 22:23

Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 22:17

This is interesting too. from wikipedia
In The Dialectic of Sex, Firestone argues that the biological division of humans based on reproductive roles is the root of women's subordination, perpetuating a patriarchal system most evident in the nuclear family. She envisions a future where artificial wombs liberate women from childbearing, rendering pregnancy obsolete. In this cybernetic communist utopia, all labor, not just reproductive, would be automated, eradicating the basis of traditional oppression.[6]

How would women be emancipated when child rearing involves a lot more than pregnancy and giving birth?

Do they stay in the pods until working age when they can be fully functioning members of the soulless, bloodless society this would lead to?

I can't work out if you're being faux naive to get a reaction out of people or if you really think it's a smart solution to a non existent problem.

Goody2ShoesAndTheFilthyBeast · 23/06/2025 22:21

Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 22:17

This is interesting too. from wikipedia
In The Dialectic of Sex, Firestone argues that the biological division of humans based on reproductive roles is the root of women's subordination, perpetuating a patriarchal system most evident in the nuclear family. She envisions a future where artificial wombs liberate women from childbearing, rendering pregnancy obsolete. In this cybernetic communist utopia, all labor, not just reproductive, would be automated, eradicating the basis of traditional oppression.[6]

Nah. Women would still be oppressed only it would be even worse because we would no longer be required for breeding.

We'd probably be kept like cattle and exist to serve and to service men.

Original poster
Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 22:17

This is interesting too. from wikipedia
In The Dialectic of Sex, Firestone argues that the biological division of humans based on reproductive roles is the root of women's subordination, perpetuating a patriarchal system most evident in the nuclear family. She envisions a future where artificial wombs liberate women from childbearing, rendering pregnancy obsolete. In this cybernetic communist utopia, all labor, not just reproductive, would be automated, eradicating the basis of traditional oppression.[6]

OP posts:
Original poster
Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 22:11

Just had a chat with hubby and told him no one on mumsnet agrees with me. He was not very sympathetic . He did make the valid point that if we did this long term, the species might evolve so that we lost the ability to give birth naturally at all.

OP posts:
WaltzingWaters · 23/06/2025 22:07

Absolutely not, no.

Morningsleepin · 23/06/2025 22:05

SoapyTW · 23/06/2025 18:50

Awful awful idea. Human trafficking nightmare. Awful for children. Commodification of human life on a mass scale. A hard no.

This

BatchCookBabe · 23/06/2025 22:05

Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 21:51

would have approved!

Show quote history

What in the living shite am I reading? Shock

BatchCookBabe · 23/06/2025 22:00

Comedycook · 23/06/2025 18:49

There are seven billion people on the planet....the old fashioned way works wonders.

8 billion.

Agree though, that this is not needed, and is quite grim!

Original poster
Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 21:58

TooManyAnimals94 · 23/06/2025 21:20

Are you a doctor OP because I find your language quite disturbing.
I long for a time when vaginal birth isn't necessary?? Sounds like wishing women weren't necessary!

So many NECESSARY things happens when you give birth (whether vaginally or c section) including the release of essential hormones, the baby recognising where to get milk by the smell of amniotic fluid being the same as the mothers areola and all the things other posters have mentioned that go on whilst the baby is in the womb.

Eeewww icky lady parts...wouldn't it be so much better if we just hatched nice clean, healthy perfect babies from eggs.

Frankenstein was written as a critique on men's fear of women's bodies and their secret desire to be rid of them. Shelley was clearly on to something.

I am a doctor but chose a branch with absolutely no blood in it lol. yes, it would be much better if we just hatched nice, clean babies from eggs I think. But hey, its not going to happen for a long time and probably only for babies who are premature etc. In the past, people were against pain relief in labour .... Society moves on. By the way I do love babies and women, but ......

OP posts:
Original poster
Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 21:54

Dabralor · 23/06/2025 21:30

I loved carrying my babies, it seemed like such a privilege.
They still curl themselves up in my lap and they still fit, in a strange way.

It would be so wrong to deprive a child of that closeness.

I kind of liked it too. But I think I could have lived without it.

OP posts:
MrsTerryPratchett · 23/06/2025 21:53

Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 21:51

would have approved!

Show quote history

🏃

🦈

Original poster
Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 21:53

DuckCootLoon · 23/06/2025 21:46

As someone who hated being pregnant, and with friends who suffered fertility issues, it seems like a good idea on the surface.
However, as the previous posts point out, in reality there would be huge potential pitfalls.

Rich people buying ready-made babies.
Issues around emotional and social development of the baby. Who knows what impact would be?
Issues around immune development of the baby, there would be no exposure to pathogens or antibodies.
Huge potential for harm to the babies that might not become apparent immediately.
I worry that it could be forced upon women as an alternative to abortion.

I don't see it as a realistic possibility anyway, thankfully. Humans are not simple organisms. There's a huge amount that we don't know or understand about our development.

Yes, I agree, theres loads of things to consider. Bet you it comes to pass though!

OP posts:
Original poster
Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 21:52

RobinHeartella · 23/06/2025 21:20

too much emotion/ lots of unnecessary screaming

I really hope you aren't truly a doctor because your stone cold lack of empathy for mothers giving birth is really breathtaking

Show quote history

I have a lot of empathy! I have been a mother 4 times :). I just think its all unecessary. My poor old pelvic floor is in shreds

OP posts:
MadameCholetsDirtySecret · 23/06/2025 21:51

Utterly abhorrent idea.

maddening · 23/06/2025 21:51

I think that there is so much they don't know about what happens between a mother and her unborn child that any attempt is highly unethical.

Even if you can get the physical requirements correct there is a lot of evidence of attachments in the late stages of gestation and when you consider the mental health of dc removed from their mothers I think it would be awful for the dc as attachment seems to be a key part of a child's development

Original poster
Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 21:51

Hedonism · 23/06/2025 21:19

Jesus Christ.

Show quote history

would have approved!

OP posts:
DuckCootLoon · 23/06/2025 21:46

As someone who hated being pregnant, and with friends who suffered fertility issues, it seems like a good idea on the surface.
However, as the previous posts point out, in reality there would be huge potential pitfalls.

Rich people buying ready-made babies.
Issues around emotional and social development of the baby. Who knows what impact would be?
Issues around immune development of the baby, there would be no exposure to pathogens or antibodies.
Huge potential for harm to the babies that might not become apparent immediately.
I worry that it could be forced upon women as an alternative to abortion.

I don't see it as a realistic possibility anyway, thankfully. Humans are not simple organisms. There's a huge amount that we don't know or understand about our development.

TooExtraImmatureCheddar · 23/06/2025 21:33

But we can’t do it. It’s not currently possible, and it may never be possible to even build a very basic version. I don’t think it would ever be possible to replicate human gestation perfectly because the whole process is so complicated and poorly understood. And even if eventually you did get near to it, it would be ruinously expensive. But we’ll be nowhere near having out-of-body gestation in any of our lifetimes.

ThePhantomoftheEcobubbleOpera · 23/06/2025 21:30

We are learning more and more about how the mother and foetus interact and the learning and experiences that shape bonding and how the interplay between the two cause genes to switch on or remain untouched. The womb isn't a silent, static, space that is akin to some matrix style cocoon hellscape.

Dabralor · 23/06/2025 21:30

I loved carrying my babies, it seemed like such a privilege.
They still curl themselves up in my lap and they still fit, in a strange way.

It would be so wrong to deprive a child of that closeness.

AlphaApple · 23/06/2025 21:26

Insane idea. Like a bad sci-fi movie. Women are not passive vessels in which babies grow, the myriad of interactions between the mother and the baby are not fully understood by medicine. The birth process is part of their development.

Just because we can do it doesn’t mean we should.

Imisscoffee2021 · 23/06/2025 21:23

It won't be properly regulated and it has the potential to be used for such leaps away from what makes us human, and precious, and beloved from earliest gestation, and the ties of parents to child. Reminds me of Logans Run and any number of dystopias. The potential cons outweigh the pros in my view.

It's a scary world for women and babies if this continues.

LoraPiano · 23/06/2025 21:20

I think it's a great idea if at all possible, but it's not practical. There would be no way to ethically test these machines.

(maybe someone building them in China already, though)

RobinHeartella · 23/06/2025 21:20

Allotmentblackfly · 23/06/2025 20:31

Interesting! Most people think its an awful idea.
Having hated with a passion obs and gynae in my training - too much blood/ too much emotion/ lots of unnecessary screaming, I always said to my husband that I looked forward to the time when vaginal birth was unnecessary.
Advantages

  1. more equal expectations of parenting from both mother and father. Father is not 'excluded' by not being the gestator
  2. Easier to see when fetus is struggling and able to provide timely intervention
  3. Great if not able to carry baby yourself - womb problems etc
  4. No need for surrogacy.
  5. Baby can be exposed to recordings of mum and dad's voice and womb sounds.
  6. no smashed pelvic floors, cesearean sections, pain in childbirth etc.
:)

too much emotion/ lots of unnecessary screaming

I really hope you aren't truly a doctor because your stone cold lack of empathy for mothers giving birth is really breathtaking